The stock market is taking a pummeling and many computer makers are feeling the pinch. Dell has been unable to hit its projected earnings due to a soft market while HP maintains it can meet quarterly projections. Apple has kept mum on the state of the economy and has turned significant profit growth for its latest quarter.

Yesterday, Apple reported its financials for Q4 fiscal 2008 that ended on September 27. Apple posted revenue of $7.9 billion and a net quarterly profit of $1.14 billion or $1.26 per diluted share. Comparing those numbers to the same period in 2007 when Apple reported revenue of $6.22 billion and a profit of $904 million for the quarter shows significant growth.

Apple's gross margin for Q4 2008 was 34.7%, up from 33.6% in 2007. After removing cost of goods for iPhone and Apple TV over the products economic lives, adjusted sales for the quarter are $11.68 billion and adjusted income is $2.44 billion.

Apple says that it shipped 2,611,000 Mac computers during the quarter for a 21% growth in shipments over 2007. Cupertino says that it sold 11,052,000 iPods during Q4, which is an 8% growth compared to 2007. IPhone sales over Q4 are 6,892,000 compared to 1,119,000 in Q4 2007. That is a massive growth that can be attributed to the increased desirability of the iPhone 3G over the original iPhone.

Apple is now ahead of Smartphone maker RIM in units sold. Steve Jobs said in a statement, "Apple just reported one of the best quarters in its history, with a spectacular performance by the iPhone—we sold more phones than RIM. We don’t yet know how this economic downturn will affect Apple. But we’re armed with the strongest product line in our history, the most talented employees and the best customers in our industry. And $25 billion of cash safely in the bank with zero debt.”

DailyTech reported in late September that Apple held 20% of the PC market in America. Apple says that 41% of its sales for Q4 came from international sales.

Comments

Threshold

Username

Password

remember me

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

One thing to keep in mind is that a lot of Apple's ads are online only, I believe. Only a select few actually get aired on TV. The online ad's I've seen from Apple are ones that people put up on YouTube, or Apple places on their site. So even if they are obvious lies, which I don't think they are, I doubt there would be any legal recourse for Microsoft.

The commercials still don't show anyone what makes a Mac better than a PC.

I think the next Microsft ad should have Windows guy shoot back with you have been telling us how great you are but never show us. Tell you what lets settle this dispute with a game of Halo oh cant play that ok Crysis, He should name applications you can run this right? No again. Run this for weeks with the Microsoft guy naming application upon application with the Mac guy saying nope cant run that.

A few weeks later the Windows guy give up and and say Ok How about you send me an e-mail using Microsoft Outlook on your Mac on what you can run.

There was a commercial about UAC; Vista has UAC, which is annoying, while the Mac does not.

Then there was the commercial about how Vista has higher hardware requirements; OS X happily runs on a 933MHz G4 (or even lower as it was running on a 500MHz G4 as well).

Or how about the commercial where Apple advertises the MagSafe power connector?

The iLife software ads? Apple's iLife arguably is better than the stock stuff found with most PCs.

Or the boxing ad where Apple claims that OS X is "simpler and more intuitive". Or put more bluntly, dumbed down for the average user without access to IT support!

Or the ad where Vista is confusing because there are 6 versions where Mac only has a single version?

Or the existence of Mac geniuses to assist Mac owners? That is another advantage of owning a Mac over a PC...

So some of the commercials rub you the wrong way; that doesn't mean they are (all) wrong nor that they don't showcase how a Mac is better than a PC... plenty of switchers indicate they "get" the ads even if you don't.

Anyway, you are essentially arguing that PCs are better at playing games... and how will the casual end user that is watching these ads even CARE about the applications you want to mention?

Because the casual end user being targetted by Apple/MS? Office, FireFox, Safari, iLife, iTunes, etc.

And don't forget the Apple ad "Touche" in which all Macs can also run Windows and all PC software as well...

All I have seen is the Apple logo and a power chord god forbid if they showed the desktop once in the commercial.

Anyone boasting about UAC hasnt used their computer more than a week to get past that but I guess you prefer not to know what applications are talking to?

Never saw a commercial with the Specs of an apple Os.

Never seen commercial of iLife in any Apple commercial or a demonstrations of it.

Never Demonstrated in a commercial how OSX is simpler and more intuitive. That is judgmental.

Ive been using Vista for a while its hardly confusing from previous windows versions unless you don't have any common sense.

Mac Geniuses are where in my neck of the woods? Oh about 45 minutes south of me while I have plenty of neighbors who would be decent at PC support if I needed it.

What is reality is Mac people want to Justify their high priced purchase and feel the need to tell PC people how dumb they are for buying a PC and not following them to buy a Mac. Its like Justifying a $2.00 Starbucks coffee actually tastes better than a $1.00 McDonalds coffee because it costs more, has a prettier paper cup, and someone says so without actually proving its actual taste.

I don't contest that Mac isn't good I actually find its decent but It is most certainly no where near superior to Windows to brag as if it is.

The reality is Apple smugness can dish it out but when the Windows crews start asking what makes you special the answer of because we say so isn't holding water any more. Just like people are finding out that McDonalds brews a better cup of coffee.

Wake me when Apple actually shows you the OS and what in reality actually makes it better than a PC. They don't show you the OS because Apples commercials are about Smugness or the feeling of superiority not about the OS actual ability to which there is no advantage.

And Thank god Apple hardware runs Windows I would hate to purchase something twice the price that didn't run any real software.

I will say I like the iPod commercial. It shows you how easy it is to use the iPod to download something. That is effective and makes me interested.

On the Windows side all they do is whine like a Biatch about Vista. That doesn't gain my interest in Apple because I use Vista daily and quite frankly its much better than XP and I don't have those issues neither does anyone I know have problems with Vista since SP1. It makes me think the people at Apple must be clueless morons if they cant figure out Vista and are having so much trouble. If you want me to look at an Apple peak my interest with something cool. Tell us something you can do on a MAC that cant be done on a PC just as easily?

Apple its just another point and click OS with hardware that costs twice as much that doesn't have all that much software for it.

Ubuntu is pretty too and its Free probably has as many applications for it that Apple has and they are Free.

The world doesn't resolve around you. Apple can choose the demo whatever they want in a commercial (BTW, they have about 30sec to impress you).

Mac Geniuses are a complete hit. Pure genius. Where do you get a 30mins to 1hour person to person tutorial on how to operate a computer and its software for FREE. I guess free support is a huge no no huh?!?!I'm sorry that you live 45mins away from the store. News to you Mitch! Good luck finding a Certified Microsoft Store that offer the same service (for free). It would be a long drive for yea.

One person's garbage is another person's gold mine. You may think it's overpriced, but the market doesn't think so. You may want to drive a WRX STI, but doesn't mean BMW M3 folks are bunch of idiots. Each to its own. They are building products that people are willing to shell out $$$ for, is that a crime?!?!

There's already a long debate in how OSX is better than Vista/XP blah blah blah. It's not different than talking about Democrats and Republicans. Either you like it or you don't.20% of the US PC market seems to think so.

It's no different than Linux vs PC talk. You can grab a linux dude and they'll say Vista/XP is a piece of shit. Actually, I've been working with PC/OSX/Linux for many years, so I'm on all sides. :->

My experience has shown that each platform has it's own pro/cons. That's why I love software like VMWARE unity. Best of both worlds. At the end of the day, I want command prompt like Linux, UI like OSX, and compatibility like XP/Vista. What's wrong with using all three!

Now, MAC's are really smart, they want you to run it as their base platform, so you are tied to them. Windows and Linux ... not so smart. they're just software that you can interchange if something new/better comes along ... which will happen.

Vista works great. Works great for me and works great for a bunch of people I work with.

Quite frankly a lot of us using Vista daily without issue wonder why your Mac campaigns still harp on Vista has problems but apparently the Marketing people at Apple really have nothing else to work with. Should those of us just sit by why you continue to bad mouth an OS that works quite fine for us? That was true up until SP1. Sure it had its issues but its more solid than XP for me now and I prefer it to XP. If I need a legacy item I open up the Free download Vitual PC and fire up XP. Thats really only my scanner which was Free when I bought XP. Quite Old now I should really upgrade and get an all in one.

Someone above explained more in their message than MAC has in their entire year long ad campaign. I know more about a Mac from that message than their year long commercials. To me thats not effective advertising but I am ok with Apple taking the majority of people who have problems turning on thier PC because thats the market the Apple ad is targeting not the competent computer people.

I will say that I think the Mac is decent but I personally hardly feel it can hold a candle to Windows Vista much less with Windows XP. The iPhone which I called the iPod below I think is Apples best commercial yet. It shows you something interesting and beneficial. To continue a whiny ad campaign that Vista has problems still is moronic. What will the Ad campaigns be when Windows 7 comes along? Same moronic banter?

A lot of people I know like the Mac hardware and have since installed Windows on their machines. How many people have done this that aren't taken into consideration but considered Mac users now despite running Windows on thier Mac hardware? Heck there were a lot of early adopters who got Vista machines and installed XP. Most I know have come back to Vista since SP1 arrived.

Plenty of Free found on Microsoft's website.

Apple needs to offer the geniuses because there is a learning curve to go from PC to Mac. Thats just a good idea for them to sell Mac.

I get it you like your Mac. I love my PC. Vista and XP are excellent. I dont need a Mac person telling us were stupid or our OS is stupid especially when it works perfectly fine.

But that's the problem -- none of their claims could be proven as wholly false, as they make general, often emotional statements. Saying a PC has a virus is not false advertising, as PCs can get viruses. It is deceptive, though as it makes it sound like ALL PCs have viruses and Macs are super secure and have none. Virtually every mac ad falls into this mold.

Unfortunately deceptive advertising is not illegal, in fact its very widespread.

The only way Microsoft can cancel Apple's PR advantage is if it can beat it at its own game -- advertising. I think the new "I'm a PC" commercials do a lot towards those ends.

I like those "I'm a PC" ads, they don't try to berate or insinuate anything. Unlike the smug apple ads. But one factor people need to remember, you'll always see apple ads everywhere, hollywood is the biggest supporter of apples, and they're all over the place in Movies, TVs, and even webisodes shows.

Sadly the only real product to represent PCs are Dells, in Movies and TV. If Sony is backing a movie, chances you'll see there computers, but you'll still see an apple.

It's sad there are a lot of people out there that'll believe what the News, TVs and Movies tells them. And even today, when I go to stores, I still hear people asking sales reps, I hear apples are easier to use than PCs. It's shocking to me, that was like a 20 yr old statement.

HOW is apple any easier to use than a PC? Everything is point and click. You push a power button, they both turn on, you use a mouse to point to a program you want to open, they both do the same. You open up a word program and type, they both do the same.

There is no abstract line programing to do on a PC, unless you're running Linux. If you want to delve into other programs like Photoshop, guess what, Adobe makes it, and whether or not its on a crapple or PC, it's the same program. If you don't understand how to use it, it's not because it's the computers fault.

Um, all Macs come with iLife... so to use an example you may be familiar with:iTunes makes it incredibly easy to manage your music catalog (as it does it for you, placing files in album/artist/genre folders, providing a searchable interface, a smart playlist interface, etc.) On top of that if you have an iPod or iPhone, synching is trivial as it literally is plug and play.

On a Mac, the above description also applies to iPhoto (photo management, making albums, uploading to MobileMe, printing books, printing photos), to iWeb (site management, page management, uploading to MobileMe), to Time Machine (backup is handled automatically, restore is via a nifty space-interface), to system wide keychain access (passwords and logins are all stored in a secured manner not available in Vista), to Spotlight (every change is recorded when a file is written so the index is always updated and search is fast and universal; unlike Vista where not everything is indexed and where search isn't universal! Try searching for "system restore" in an Explorer Window. The only way it is "universal" is if you know to go to My Computer first), to installation (Mac defaults to a single drag and drop App container, Vista defaults to a wizard based installer requiring hundreds of files, usually), and finally to UAC (Mac asks when the system files are going to be changed or a password protected file is going to be read, Vista will ask just so you can launch Device Manager!)

Here's another difference between Mac and Windows PC. When you press Win-D twice on a PC you get windows Z order messed up (topmost window disappears under some background window) and windows flicker and redraw like hell on Vista Aero (so all this GPU-based Aero stuff is no more than pure marketing BS from Ballmer's gang, just press Win-D twice and see for yourself). Use the same function (F11 keyboard key) on a Mac and it's a beauty and elegance itself compared with PC's ugliness. When you press F11 on a Mac windows slide away beautifully from the desktop, and then you press F11 again and they smoothly return back to their positions and the Z order is not messed up like on a PC.

What does it tell you guys? If you are a Windows fanatic (people like reclaimer, savage potato and others, they know who they are) then obviously you will argue that this never happens, that Vista is not at fault, that Ballmer is good and everything is good yada yada, I heard all that.

But I'm not a Windows fanatic so I can't stay blind to this. It's obvious to me and anyone who's not fanatical that MS simply can't code their user interfaces properly. Their coders do crap job most of the time, they just don't know what is beauty and elegance in user interface.

This is one of the reasons the Apple Tax does exist. If MS were doing their job properly, with passion and attention to detail (i.e. Apple-style) then the Apple Tax couldn't exist at all. It's that simple :)

Yeah, MS has advertised this feature as "show and hide desktop" so you right in that sense - Win-D indeed shows and hides desktop, so it does work as advertised. It's the little details I mentioned above that make a big difference. Sometimes "as advertised" is not enough after you've seen how competition does the same thing. Try F11 in Mac OS X and you'll see what I'm talking about.

If you don't have a competitor to compare Windows against - no wonder this sounds like a BS to you. Your reaction is perfectly normal for a person who has never worked with Mac OS X.

It works just fine for me, and at the office I DO support OS x... I just place them on the firewall's DMZ for security. Your 'f11' key is no better than 'win d'. They both work as advertised. So bugger off, please...

You must be a Windows fanatic. I can't find any other reasonable explanation for not seeing the obvious - ugly flickering when windows get redrawn after pressing Win-D twice. I don't own any Macs and not going to 'cause I'm a gamer, (but I use PowerMac G5 at work, bought for me by my company for some special Mac-only software), hence I can't be Mac fanatic but still I can see Win-D ugliness very clearly.

Z order is not always screwed in Windows, only sometimes, so it's normal that you don't see it (you probably have 2-3 windows open, then this bug is not likely to appear) but not seeing obvious flickering and ugly window redrawing? If you are not Windows fanatic then maybe you use just a couple of very lightweight apps like notepad, maybe their windows don't flicker and redraw in a less ugly and noticeable way, hence your inability to see what I see.

Well, here goes!Windows Media Player is just as easy to figure out as iTunes without being so bloated and only supporting a few players through proprietary methods, and has enough features to be a good media manager including live library updating which iTunes doesn't have. (I'm not saying WMP is grat but it performs the same task) I would never waste my money on such a proprietary music player or phone.And while you may have all these photo and video apps (which us "PC" users have had for a while), we're not forced to using one specific service like MobileMe. You obviously don't know about Windows Live either, which has web-based and desktop-based apps that do the same things as your MobileMe for free. I also use a CMS for my website because I can edit my website anywhere, even completely redesign it and add extra plug-in functionality. Can't do that with a desktop based editor. Time Machine, i.e. Backup. How about skipping past the nifty space-interface and just letting me right click on a file and choose a previous version? Pretty simple. An installation wizard is SO difficult and lengthy, yes, but I don't see how having to download a DMG, mounting it as a drive and dragging the icon from one place to another is so intuitive (Apple's favorite word to describe their products) either. I couldn't figure it out at first, partly because it's so impersonal unlike a wizard. And finally to UAC, it prompts you when you are going to make a system level change, simple as that. Going into the device manager is a system task, so I'm not sure why you chose that example. Whatever, I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion, I'm just saying what I think.

Why should the system change when you launch device manager? You aren't prompted when you enable/disable a device, but you are when you launch device manager. Isn't that kind of backwards? Heck, in researching backup, the backup wizard requires UAC approval!

And you don't address my points on simplicity: I only use iTunes as an example, I never claimed WMP wasn't similarly intuitive.

I have PCs, and you fail to point to a similar photo app that is as intuitive as iPhoto. I use Picassa, and while nice, isn't nearly AS nice. And you mention a CMS; which CMS can you buy for under $16? (Assuming iPhoto is $16, iWeb is $16, GarageBand is $16, iMovie is $16, and iDVD is $16)? Or alternatively, under $40 if you want to argue Picassa is equivalent to iPhoto and iMovie is equivalent to Windows Movie Maker?

How about my points on automatic backup? Vista File Backup is at best daily while at worst monthly... Mac OS X backup is BETTER because it occurs HOURLY for the past 24 hours, daily for the past month, and weekly for anything older... How is that not by definition better than anything Vista has?

I mean, how is that NOT intuitive? The DMG normally has instructions right in the folder saying, "Please copy this application to your computer --->" with arrow included!

So my point still stands: UAC shows up way too often, and worse, doesn't when you actually do change the system via restore or driver install, backup on the Mac is actually better, applications are simpler or better for consumer oriented tasks, and I haven't even mentioned the benefits of Expose, Dashboard, and Spaces over Flip3D and SideBar.

Everyone in this forum is thinking like a power user. For a everyday joe user, OSX is more intuitive to use. Their features are more refined. Less buttons to screw up.

Look at iMAC. how many ways can you plug something wrong?!?!?! You save a whole lot of space on the desk too. All basic software is included. They have iTunes integeration, decent dvd player software, you can preview movies better than most .... it gets the job done.

A PC .... you have to hook up video connector, install drivers, defrag hdd, virus scanners, spydoctor, ... the list goes on and on. For someone who's done it before, no problem, but for avg joe, it just doesn't make sense.

Its all about price. Xbox360 sales took off when there was a price cut, the same with the iPhone. Nvidia cut prices drastically when the 48xx's came out.

With software, upgrading is always a hard sell if its not "broken" already. Put Apple back on a defensive by undercutting the price of the OS to $50. Then play the economic situtation with the advertising tag line of "Can you afford Apple" positioning the high costs of being a smug Apple fan.

Remember when browsers were at a cost? Microsoft undercut that by including IE for free. Microsoft has always positioned itself as the value leader, shouldn't be an different with Vista.

quote: . It is deceptive, though as it makes it sound like ALL PCs have viruses and Macs are super secure and have none.

You know, as a teacher when I gave out homework to be done on a computer, I'd get at least 30% or so saying that their computer weren't working all that well, were broken, or were about to be fixed due to viruses on machines running XP. Feeling secure online with a Mac is the biggest incentive to change teams. If those folks want to play a game, usually they buy a Nintendo or some other less popular gaming TV box. Businesses, who want to be able to count on their computers, are also wooed by the fact that an Apple out of the box usually runs better than a PC out of the box. Now, I have a PC, won't be going Mac at least until the PC is on the verge of extinction. I haven't had a virus since around 2002. I'm no computer guru, but I've devoted a fair amount of time to understanding how to protect my machine from them, which is something technophobes are repulsed from.

Jobs is a genius, there's no doubt about that. He took a flailing company and is quickly turning it into competition for the biggest computer distributors, the most popular portable media player, and their phone business is rocking as well. They're missing out on the netbook revolution that ASUS began, but surely that's temporary.

OS X is arguably the most insecure OS to ever be allowed to attach to the internet. In every SANS vulnerabilities list released, there are unpatched, un-acknowledged holes all over the place. Apple never really acknowledges a hole, but sometimes in their next patch that flaw just 'might' disappear. Patch notes? Huh? You don't need to know, trust Apple. Then they sell the end user a patch rollup, and call it an upgrade. Upgrade notes? Marketing spiel...

Is MS perfect? No, of course not. But when a flaw is found, they at least acknowledge it, and will include the patch in their next SCHEDULED update. With detailed notes, BTW... If the flaw is harmful enough, they'll release an out of cycle patch.

Properly installed/used, MS is pretty secure.

Apple depends on 'security through obscurity', and also the fact that their users are even more clueless about their OS than MS's users...

Vista, imo, is the most secure OS I've used since Windows 2000. But seriously, when XP came out and for awhile after that, unless you did your duty in getting 3rd party fills, you were like Scully walking through a long-term prison facility. You were a walking advertisement for abuse.

Don't get me wrong, XP was a great OS, but out of the box it was a beacon for predators.

But, maybe I really would have to buy a Mac to become intimate with its defects.

The only reason Mac is free of viruses is that no one gets Mac to do programming, so there's no one out there to write viruses... yet.

For me, that is as saying "I'm safe on the streets not because my car has 6 airbags and 5-stars in crash test, but because I'm driving carefully". That is true for only as long as everyone else is driving carefully (which is what we have in the land of Mac now). But as soon as some people stop driving carefully, you learn you're not safe at all.

As the Mac's market share and profile grow, programmers will start emerging. Hackers will start emerging. Mac is like a candy store with doors wide open and store owner on the lunch break; sooner or later, someone wise kid, with no real games to play with on Mac, will decide to "educate" himself in the art of virus making for fun. It is just in humans' nature.

As long as Macs cost just a little bit more than PCs, they will maintain their niche status... even if the niche grows to 20%. And as long as they cost more and maintain a niche status, virus writers have no incentive to write to them.

And as long as that is true, then viruses will be few and far between. Eventually Macs will drop in price to the point that even virus writers will buy them... but that will probably be 10 years from now when a Mac costs $120 and a PC costs $100...

Like the one with digital camera. I have older Canon digital camera that came with Windows-only software. Plus I saw another one that, while it worked with Mac, had limited functionality - PC software bundle had more features.

True, I'm talking about older cameras - early 2000-ish. Along the way difference in support was reduced and likely disappeared, but I do challenge you to find any digital camera that works with Mac and does not come with same or better Windows support. Yet for a newbie, message is simple and very misleading - if you want to do digital photo, you're better and safer of with Mac. And that is a simple, complete and utter LIE - not just an emotional statement.

Sorry, but I disagree with this statement entirely. The whole point of digital photography on the Mac is that you only need to plug the camera or memory card and away you go. There is no need to load drivers or software to access the pictures. This makes things a lot simpler for the user and has the advantage that you don't need to load any software to access pictures from a friend's camera, which is pretty convenient.

The Mac OS also understands RAW files for most cameras so you can see what the pictures look like in the Finder without needing to "developing" them first in software like Adobe Camera RAW.

True price is a driving force for consumers, even if they are too stupid to realize the $199 iPhone is actually more expensive over the 2yr contract.

I think the real reason for the boon in iPhone sales was the inclusion of Exchange. As a network admin iPhones where not supported by IT period. Now I encourage ppl to check them out. Why pay for a RIM server when I already have an Exchange server that is super easy to setup on a Windows Mobile, or iPhone device. We are a fairly small company about 100 users or so, and we had 5 iPhones purchased in the last month alone.

more expensive than what? I'm confused, if a person has AT&T an iPhone plan is no more than a plan on a Blackberry, or a WM phone. The iPhone isn't magically more expensive every month. Yes they could get a cheaper plan with Sprint or T-Mobile but if they're already with AT&T the iPhone is a good choice. The fact they have to get a data plan with it is a moot point, I don't know a single person who would want that high level of a phone without having internet on it.

What version of OSX costs 50 dollars? In fact between the time XP was released until Vista was released (6 years) There have been 7 different OSX 'upgrades' and although some were free, others you had the choice to pay for an OS revision, or buy a new Mac because your old Mac was no longer supported.

Mac's don't sell because of the price of the OS, which should be pretty obvious, as you have to buy a Mac in order to use OSX legally. They sell because of their image, that should be pretty obvious by now.

Exactly my point... none and it would be the best PR Microsoft can generate now. Spin it however you want, but if Microsoft says we are now charging $50 for Vista, that would be historic. Remember how much positive PR Microsoft received when they extended the 360's warranty?

To protect future Windows 7 sales, the $50 Vista copies should include a $75 coupon off of future sale towards Windows 7. Microsoft always does well "gimmicks" like this; look at their MCP exams that allow retakes or the getting paid to list stuff on Ebay schemes. Consumers always like a good value.

Macs always had an issue selling due to price point compared to equal PC hardware. Now that the image of excess is no longer in fashion, Apple will have issues justifying the price differential in ALL of their product line.

However, combating Apple with more advertising in the current economy is foolish since there are better ways to spend that money. Microsoft would get FREE adverising by word of mouth if a simple email to all MCPs about the $50 to pass along - just like those Starbucks coupons sent to random people not long ago. How much did they spend on Seinfeld? That could have easily covered the cost of $50 Vista by adverising via email.

You are totally overlooking Microsofts entire business model, business licensing first, home user second. They already have the entire business market cornered, and Apple has not even come close to being considered competition. What you don't get is the battleground for Microsoft is in the business world, and the battleground for Apple is in the Home and personal use market. Lowering prices for Windows to home users will only force them to lower pricing for their proven model that accounts for most of their profits.

In other words, I completely disagree with you, Microsoft offering a OS that cheap would undermine their entire business strategy. Where I do agree with you is that it would be a historic decision, as that day would mark the beginning of the end for Microsoft.

Microsoft will compete with Apple in the home market by releasing a better OS suited for the casual users needs, not by lowering the price of their OS, especially when you consider that most casual users get their copy of windows with their new PC, and not from a retail store.

Do you remember when MS exchanged XP 32bit copies with XP 64bit for free? Doing the similar for XP to Vista would increase the population of Vista and legally nullify exisitng XP licenses on both the corporate and consumer markets.

In the not-for-porfit world where I am a CTO, MS already provides Charity licensing at less than $50! However, few business (profit and ngo) are using Vista for several reasons, including desktop support and training.

Let's be honest, the Vista deployment was flawed and the Apple ads are capitalizing how Vista is a "dirty" word.

Businesses and consumers will find it hard to justify upgrading to Vista now that Windows 7 is around the corner. The only way to increase acceptance and respond to Apple is by undercutting the price.

quote: Let's be honest, the Vista deployment was flawed and the Apple ads are capitalizing how Vista is a "dirty" word.

The flaw in Vista was that it lacked a clear value proposition - in other words, it did not have clearly visible new capabilities or features that really justified an upgrade for most people.

And in my opinion, Apple is further damaging Vista's reputation by portraying it as flawed, unreliable, problematic etc. Those portrayals are wrong, but Microsoft has done nothing to counter them in terms of trying to change public opinion about Vista. Their new marketing campaign, while I think is generally good, doesn't effectivly address this perception problem.

quote: Those portrayals are wrong, but Microsoft has done nothing to counter them in terms of trying to change public opinion about Vista.

Right on the money IMHO.

Who can fault Apple for trying to expand it's business? As far as I can tell there is very little market growth. The name of the game now is taking customers from competitors.

This is Microsoft's game to lose and since they waited so long to do any worthwhile marketing of their product they are the ones to blame for whatever market share they lose.

If you were ever bored one day you could check back on my previous posts here at DT and see that I've called Microsoft out on this lack of marketing before there was ever an announcement of $300M on this current campaign.

Their initial "The wow starts now" campaign was pathetic and laughable.

quote: Macs always had an issue selling due to price point compared to equal PC hardware. Now that the image of excess is no longer in fashion, Apple will have issues justifying the price differential in ALL of their product line.

Macs have always cost more, and it doesn't seem to be causing them issues. People who are looking to buy Macs aren't looking to save money, they want the mac and they're willing to pay for it. Dropping the price of Vista won't likely stop those folks. It might, however, lure XP users who have been wary of switching to Vista to perhaps give it a shot. But I'm not sure it would be worth the loss of revenue.

And you might tick off all the folks who just recently had to pay a lot more for Vista. When Apple suddenly dropped the price of the first iPhone, they ended up having to give out vouchers/coupons of some sort to placate those who paid full price just days earlier.

Despite the regularly heated debates on DT and the entertaining PR battle, Apple is still relatively small compared to MS. I don't think MS is really worried about large business losses to Apple, just annoyed at the image war, and possibly a little defensive about the perceived Vista shortcomings.

Yeah MS never lies to us, not even when they did the side by side test showing Win 3.1 vs 95 to show us how much faster 95 was for the Internet. They had forgotten to tell us the 3.1 box had a 14.4k modem and the 95 box had a 33.6k. That was beyond shady, gotta love it :)

Misleading is not false advertising. How's that any different than politics. I didn't see anyone going to jail.

Alot of "facts" are 1/2 truths. Just like Steve Jobs said 20% PC market share .... (US market that is). I wouldn't call that false advertising .... but promoting your company. It is upto the consumer to get educated, and seek the full details.

As shown in politics, you can spin facts in way you want. Even a mistake can be perceived as a triumph. Hell, even a unqualified candidate can be promoted as the most experienced out of the bunch.

The bottom line is Apple is doing well, and that cannot be disputed. Don't hate them because they are successful.